serum 25(oH)D level in patients with CoVID-19

Abstract

Recently, vitamin D deficiency is considered as a risk factor for the incidence and severity of new coronavirus infection. The aim of this work was to evaluate the vitamin D level of patients with COVID-19 hospitalized with communityacquired pneumonia and compare the value of 25(OH)D in blood serum with the clinical manifestations of the disease. Results. Included are 80 patients aged 18 to 94 years (mean age 53,2 ± 15,7 years), 43 (53,8%) men; with severe course – in 25 (31,3%) patients (12 males), and moderate – in 55 people (68,7%) (31 males). Half of the severely ill patients were obese, and among the deceased patients, the number of obese people was 61,5%, which was significantly higher than the discharged ones – 14,9% (p<0,001). Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular diseases occurred with the same frequency, regardless of the severity of the disease. Analysis of the outcomes of coronavirus infection in these patients showed mortality in 52,0% of cases in severe patients. Serum 25(OH)D level ranged from 3,0 to 88,8 ng / ml (16,7 ± 12,7 ng / ml). It was found that in patients with severe course, the level of 25(OH)D blood was significantly lower (11.9 ± 6.4 ng / ml) and vitamin D deficiency was more common than in patients with moderate to severe course of the disease (18,5 ± 14,0 ng / ml, p = 0,027). The same pattern was revealed in patients with a fatal outcome, where the level of 25(OH)D was 10,8 ± 6,1 ng / ml, compared with this indicator in patients discharged from the hospital (17,8 ± 13,4 ng / ml) (p = 0,02). Conclusions. Vitamin D deficiency and obesity have been found to increase the risk of severe course and death of coronavirus infection.

Influence of 25-hydroxy-cholecalciferol levels on SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…After their removal, no heterogeneity was found (Chi 2 P = 0.23, I 2 =27%), and the analysis still showed a statistical significance [MD −7.74 (−8.79, −6.69); p <0.00001]. Since in some studies the 25(OH)D levels were not measured in the same period as the cases [ 43 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 50 , 51 ], we excluded them from the analysis, but the statistical significance was maintained [MD −7.59 (−10.38, −4.81); p <0.00001] (Supplementary Fig. 1A) .…”

“…Finally, 29 articles met our inclusion criteria and, therefore, were included in this meta-analysis ( Fig. 1 ) [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] , [36] , [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] . Table 1 shows the main characteristics of the studies selected.…”

“…For these reasons, several authors have evaluated the difference in 25(OH)D levels between infected patients and healthy ones, as well as the role of VDD in the risk of developing COVID-19 and its complications, but with contrasting results [12] , [13] , [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] , [18] , [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] , [36] , [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] . Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to shed light on the numerous data in the literature on this topic to establish whether hypovitaminosis D represents a real risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection and, therefore, whether its integration can be an additional weapon in the fight against COVID-19.…”

Association of Vitamin D Status with SARS-CoV-2 Infection or COVID-19 Severity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…Among 15 studies that assessed the relation between mortality and VDD, 13 studies were included in the analysis. Pooled analysis of 4 adjusted studies that used the Cox survival method ( 13 , 51 , 56 , 60 ) (HR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.22, 4.52; I 2 : 84%; Figure 4 A ) and 5 studies ( 44 , 47 , 53 , 55 , 62 ) with crude OR (OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.13, 6.05; I 2 : 47.8%; Figure 4B ) indicated a significant association of VDD with mortality, while in adjusted studies that used logistic regression ( 54 , 59 , 65 ), no relation was observed (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.75; I 2 : 76.6%). Two studies were not included in the analysis since 1 study had an RCT design ( 36 ) and another one used different statistical methods ( 64 ).…”

“…Moreover, 6 studies compared serum concentrations of 25(OH)D between deceased patients and those who survived ( 50 , 54 , 55 , 60 , 63 , 66 ); pooled analysis of studies indicated lower concentrations of 25(OH)D in patients who died compared with those who survived (WMD: −9.05 ng/mL; 95% CI: −13.86, −4.23; I 2 : 87.8%; Supplemental Figure 3 ). Results of studies are summarized in Supplemental Table 10 .…”